Recently, in response to a letter submitted to our Kentucky state Baptist paper‘s Baptist Forum section that seemed to say “No creed but the Bible,” I felt the need to respond to this mindset. Given how many Southern Baptists are straying to other cults such as Mormonism and the Jehovah’s Witnesses because of the lack of biblical depth they possess, I wrote the following.

I am saddened and stunned at the outcry of those who lament how Southern Baptists seek to clarify doctrinal issues concerning the Scriptures, God, Christ, the church, and family. And yet all of us show the same type of shock when we see that of all the denominations from which the cults steal their sheep, Southern Baptist are their primary source of growth. Why is this?

It is because we Southern Baptists define ourselves more by what we do than by what we believe. Look back over older Western Recorder editions: they spent more time teaching what the Scriptures say rather than talking about missions and church growth almost to the exclusion of doctrinal beliefs. In fact, when Southern Baptists take a stand, they are derided as uncaring, academic, and divisive.

I am all for loving Jesus, but I believe creeds are just as valuable as the deeds. Both must be present — both the content of Scripture as well as the fruit of obedience to the Scriptures. I am for loving the Jesus of the Bible who has clear attributes and had a clear mission for His people. Until Southern Baptist rigorously study who Jesus is, what He has done, what the implications are for us who claim to be Christ-followers, what he expects from His Church and its individual members, we will continue to be fodder for those who deny the faith as we will cease to grow in any significant and spiritual way. Numbers are not the only way to grow a church — we need to be sure there are enough faithful in the church already as well!

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Christians in a Pakistani town beset by pro-Taliban militants sought government protection Wednesday, the eve of a deadline for them to convert to Islam or face violence.

About 500 Pakistani Christians in Charsadda, a town in the North West Frontier Province bordering Afghanistan, received letters earlier this month telling them to close their churches and convert by Thursday or be the target of “bomb explosions.”

Several Christians, a tiny minority in the predominantly Muslim country, have fled town and others are living in fear, community leaders said.

Some complained that police were not taking the threat seriously.

“Police say someone is joking with us by writing these letters,” Chaudhry Salim, a Charsadda Christian leader, said during a news conference in Islamabad. “They have deployed only two policemen at our churches … this is the kind of security we are getting now.”

Is Mormonism now a part of the American mainstream? That question raises a host of issues — including the question of what constitutes the “mainstream” now anyway?

There are two questions here. One has to do with the status of Mormonism, the second with the definition of the mainstream.

I must answer the Mormon question first, and from two perspectives. As an evangelical Christian theologian, I must clarify that Mormonism is in no way consistent with orthodox Christianity. It borrows Christian themes and texts, but its most basic beliefs directly contradict the central teachings of Christianity.

We are not into partcular love or limited atonement. As a matter of fact we consider it heresy.”

“Heresy”? What an unfortunate use of words. Irenaeus in the 2nd century defined heresy in a work of his as such:

Error, indeed, is never set forth in its naked deformity, lest, being thus exposed, it should at once be detected. But it is craftily decked out in on attractive dress, so as, by its outward form, to make it appear to the inexperienced (ridiculous as the expression may seem) more true than truth itself (IrenaeusAgainst Heresies 1.2) (HT: Matt Slick, CARM)

In fact, condemnation falls upon those who are false teachers of false doctrines. Galatians 1:8-9 tells us:

But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you [MRP: that is, preaches heresy], let him be accursed. [9] As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.

Also in Titus 3:10:

As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him,

Clearly, this is a serious matter. Clearly, the use of this word should never be used lightly. Clearly, we must be careful when calling something we do not hold to be true or agree with ‘heresy.’

Tom Ascol makes an excellent point here:

Does Jerry Falwell and Liberty University really judge John Piper to be a heretic? If we take his words seriously, as surely we ought if we are to honor him, then he believes that Al Mohler, R.C. Sproul, John MacArthur, D. James Kennedy, Ligon Duncan, Mark Dever, Tom Nettles, Wayne Grudem, Sinclair Ferguson, James White and Fred Malone teach heresy.

That certainly is his and Liberty’s right to believe. I simply regret that they believe it. I do not regard my universal redemptionist brothers to be heretics because of their views of general atonement. I think they are wrong and they think the same of me. But that does not mean that we have to accuse each other of being heretics.

In a recent blog entry (“Why All the Angst Against Calvinism, Objection I: They Are Not Evangelistic“) that has just recently caught some attention, I understand the objections against it — in fact, I used to hold to them rather stringently as well. Yet, I never found myself telling others they were flat heretics when they believed in Christ and his atoning work on the cross. This is a hard issue to reconcile and I have my convictions which I believe speak from Scripture.

But when Jerry Falwell with his influence begins to use this language, and when Ergun Caner says that “Calvinists are worse than Muslims,” I shake my head that these men as leaders of an influential bastion of an evangelical institution of higher learning throw out comments such as this. It seems rather irresponsible.

But, as Ascol also points out, at least he’s forthright and honest about his beliefs. Disagree, but do so in a manner which does not slanderize those who disagree with you. I expected more from Falwell and Caner.

We are not into partcular love or limited atonement. As a matter of fact we consider it heresy.”

“Heresy”? What an unfortunate use of words. Irenaeus in the 2nd century defined heresy in a work of his as such:

Error, indeed, is never set forth in its naked deformity, lest, being thus exposed, it should at once be detected. But it is craftily decked out in on attractive dress, so as, by its outward form, to make it appear to the inexperienced (ridiculous as the expression may seem) more true than truth itself (IrenaeusAgainst Heresies 1.2) (HT: Matt Slick, CARM)

In fact, condemnation falls upon those who are false teachers of false doctrines. Galatians 1:8-9 tells us:

But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you [MRP: that is, preaches heresy], let him be accursed. [9] As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.

Also in Titus 3:10:

As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him,

Clearly, this is a serious matter. Clearly, the use of this word should never be used lightly. Clearly, we must be careful when calling something we do not hold to be true or agree with ‘heresy.’

Tom Ascol makes an excellent point here:

Does Jerry Falwell and Liberty University really judge John Piper to be a heretic? If we take his words seriously, as surely we ought if we are to honor him, then he believes that Al Mohler, R.C. Sproul, John MacArthur, D. James Kennedy, Ligon Duncan, Mark Dever, Tom Nettles, Wayne Grudem, Sinclair Ferguson, James White and Fred Malone teach heresy.

That certainly is his and Liberty’s right to believe. I simply regret that they believe it. I do not regard my universal redemptionist brothers to be heretics because of their views of general atonement. I think they are wrong and they think the same of me. But that does not mean that we have to accuse each other of being heretics.

In a recent blog entry (“Why All the Angst Against Calvinism, Objection I: They Are Not Evangelistic“) that has just recently caught some attention, I understand the objections against it — in fact, I used to hold to them rather stringently as well. Yet, I never found myself telling others they were flat heretics when they believed in Christ and his atoning work on the cross. This is a hard issue to reconcile and I have my convictions which I believe speak from Scripture.

But when Jerry Falwell with his influence begins to use this language, and when Ergun Caner says that “Calvinists are worse than Muslims,” I shake my head that these men as leaders of an influential bastion of an evangelical institution of higher learning throw out comments such as this. It seems rather irresponsible.

But, as Ascol also points out, at least he’s forthright and honest about his beliefs. Disagree, but do so in a manner which does not slanderize those who disagree with you. I expected more from Falwell and Caner.

Oliver “Buzz” Thomas wrote an article in the USA Today Opinion section about whether religion has lost its credibility by condemning homosexuality in today’s culture. Thomas is no ordinary journalist — he is a “Baptist minister.” He notes that he is “a former ‘the Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it’ kind of guy, I am sympathetic with any Christian who accepts the Bible at face value.” The operative word in that sentence is the word “former.” Apparently, as the article implies, he has moved on and evolved from that position.

His premise is as follows:

Despite what you might have read, heard or been taught throughout your churchgoing life, homosexuality is, in fact, determined at birth and is not to be condemned by God’s followers.

For someone who is a former biblical literalist who seems to turn away from Christian exclusivism, he has now turned to another type of exclusivism. Homosexuality “is not to be condemned by God’s followers.” Direct, to the point — a the phraseology is that of a rule one must follow!

So we have now come to the point in 2006 where we are now enlightened to this? What a privileged age we must be in to now, after 3500 years of obeying biblical law that’s found in both Old and New Testaments and has been understood by civilizations all across this world for all times, whether they adhered to the Bible of not, that this is something one is born with and is not a choice.

Sarcasm aside, they call us arrogant for purporting this truth. How arrogant of them to think that after all this time they have now been enlightened when they have 3,000 years of history who says otherwise.

He goes on:

As a former “the Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it” kind of guy, I am sympathetic with any Christian who accepts the Bible at face value. But here’s the catch. Leviticus is filled with laws imposing the death penalty for everything from eating catfish to sassing your parents. If you accept one as the absolute, unequivocal word of God, you must accept them all.

What scares me most is not his logic, but that he is a Baptist minister preaching in a pulpit to people who actually believe he understands the Scriptures. Read the Old Testament in light of the new and you will see that those dietary and ceremonial rituals and laws were fulfilled in Christ who is the end of the law (Romans 10:4) and the fulfillment of the law (Matthew 5:17-18). Now, the moral law is still in place, which I will address in a moment. But Christ has set Christians free from the tedious and laborious nature of trying to appeal and be accepted by God by doing good things. Christ came and said, “By faith in me, you are accepted — now go and obey.”

As for the moral laws, specifically pertaining to homosexuality in the Scriptures, listen/read Thomas’ logic:

What would Jesus do?

For those who have lingering doubts, dust off your Bibles and take a few hours to reacquaint yourself with the teachings of Jesus. You won’t find a single reference to homosexuality. There are teachings on money, lust, revenge, divorce, fasting and a thousand other subjects, but there is nothing on homosexuality. Strange, don’t you think, if being gay were such a moral threat?

Mr. Thomas’ examination of the Scriptures seems to lie in the fact that Jesus never used the word ‘homosexual’ in a negative way — when in fact Jesus never used the word ‘homosexual’ in any way! So Mr. Thomas’ logic is,

A: Jesus said a lot of things that we should and shouldn’t do.
B: Jesus never addressed homosexuality.
Therefore, Jesus did not have a problem with homosexuality, or he would have addressed it.

But he did! He did, he did, he did! Jesus did address the homosexuality issue, folks. He also addressed the adultery and fornication issue in one verse.

Matthew 5:27-28
“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ [28] But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Some say, “He’s talking about adultery, not homosexuality!” The issue is, he’s talking about lusting after someone who is not their spouse in a God-ordained way. Jesus also said in Matthew 19:1-6:

Now when Jesus had finished these sayings, he went away from Galilee and entered the region of Judea beyond the Jordan. [2] And large crowds followed him, and he healed them there. [3] And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?” [4] He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, [5] and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh’? [6] So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”

God created them male and female — not male and male or female and female. A man shall be joined to his female wife. That’s the order. So when Thomas elsewhere in the article notes that sexual promiscuity is the sin in the Scriptures, not sexual fidelity, he moves God’s boundaries between man and woman. God’s boundaries are not simply between two people who love each other regardless. God provided the anatomical equipment as well as the spiritual foreordained way of connecting two people physically and spiritually.

How sad that so many in our country are turning this into a civil rights issue. It’s more than that. The Bible calls this a sin in the likes of other heinous sins listed in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. It cannot be dismissed —

. . . unless you are like Buzz Thomas who seems to have evolved from Scripture.

May God have mercy on those who are entrusted to his pastoral care.

(I wonder if USA Today would take time to print a conservative, biblical, evangelical Op/Ed on this topic! Something tells me that will not be the case. Stay tuned!)

So Jesus addresses homosexuality and every other sexual encounter outside of one man-one woman marriage. He doesn’t have to use the word to address it.

“I think there’s something wrong with me. I just don’t understand Christmas. I like getting presents, sending cards, decorating trees and all that. But instead of feeling happy, I feel sort of let down.”

–Charlie Brown, A Charlie Brown Christmas, 1965

When I was a child in the 1950s, my parents didn’t have much money to spend at Christmastime. I remember one Christmas when I wanted a cowboy gun and holster from Santa Claus. I got the toy pistol, but Santa, it seems, couldn’t afford a holster. So my dad made one for me out of one of my mother’s old leather purses. It didn’t look like the ones on TV, but it worked pretty well. And it made me feel good that my dad cared enough to do what he could to make a little boy’s Christmas dream come true.

Being poor didn’t really matter all that much because there was magic in the air. And the magic of Christmas was promoted in the schools. We sang Christmas carols in the classroom. There were cutouts of the Nativity scene on the bulletin board, along with the smiling, chubby face of Santa and Rudolph. We were all acutely aware that Christmas was more than a season to receive—it was a special time to give as well.

But times have changed. Violence and turmoil surround our schools. Police officers walk the hallways, and embattled teachers act more like wardens than instructors. Sadly, the timeless celebration of Christmas seems to have been lost in the mix as well. Schools across the country avoid anything that alludes to the true meaning of Christmas—such as angels, the baby Jesus, stables and shepherds. For example, a member of a parent/teacher organization at a Connecticut elementary school was in charge of decorating a large display case in the school’s entrance. For the upcoming December holidays, she was planning to put up a display called “Festival of Lights” and feature a display with a crèche for Christmas and a Menorah and Star of David for Hanukkah, along with a document that explains the histories of both events. However, she was told by school officials that no religious objects could be used in the display.

A kindergarten teacher in a Texas public school was informed that he could not mention the word “Christmas” or tell the historical Nativity story because someone in the district might sue. All other secular customs of the “winter holiday” were deemed to be okay, just not the religious symbols of Christianity. According to the school principal: “We cannot tie candy canes, trees, wreaths, Santa Claus, etc, as a religious symbol. What we can teach is the secular side of holidays. We can have the tree, candy cane, wreath, Santa Claus, etc, anything that is secular. No religious words can be attached. We cannot read aloud to the students any book pertaining to religious beliefs or happenings brought by you [the teacher] or the students. The student who brings a book can read/look at the book silently.”

Another incident that highlights this extreme Christmas phobia involves a Michigan elementary school, where the principal issued a directive specifically forbidding references to God, Christianity or the birth of Jesus Christ. This is censorship, pure and simple.

I have yet to understand how anyone can discuss the true—or even historical—meaning of Christmas without at least a reference to Christ. Surely something has gone wrong when America’s children are encouraged to celebrate the fictional Rudolph but are refused the opportunity to even mention Jesus, who was an actual, historical person. To claim that Christmas is something other than it is—a holiday with a religious foundation—is both dishonest and historically unsound.

Indeed, Christmas (Old English Cristes Moesse, “the Mass of Christ”) was instituted, and for centuries kept, as a religious holiday (as in “holy day”). Originally, Christmas included festivities, but its primary purpose was to provide a time for spiritual renewal.

Unfortunately, far too many parents, students and teachers erroneously believe they cannot celebrate the religious nature of Christmas in the public schools. Whether through ignorance or fear, Americans are painfully misguided about the recognition of religious holidays. Ironically, the most targeted religious holiday for exclusion is Christmas—also the most popular in American culture. Are our schoolchildren to be forbidden from learning about one of the most culturally significant events because it has religious overtones?

There are constitutional ways to celebrate Christmas in the public schools without violating the United States Constitution. These are succinctly set forth in The Rutherford Institute’s “Twelve Rules of Christmas.” While it is true that public school teachers, as agents of the state, may not advance religion, they are allowed to discuss the role of religion in all aspects of American culture and its history. And this includes the religious aspects of the Christmas holiday.

Indeed, teachers can use Christmas art, music, literature and drama in their classrooms, as long as they illustrate the cultural heritage from which the holiday has developed. Religious symbols, such as a Nativity scene, can be used in this context as well. Of course, any holiday observance should occur in an educational setting, rather than in a devotional atmosphere. Teachers should also remember to offer students and their parents the school district’s opt-out policy as an alternative to the teaching about any particular religion.

While our Constitution does not give carte blanche to promote religion in the public schools, neither does it dictate a cleansing of Christmas from the classroom. Students may enjoy the same freedom of religious expression that is allowed any other time of the year—in or out of the classroom. This means that students can freely distribute Christmas or Hanukkah cards to their friends and teachers, just as they would a birthday card. Such cards can even mention the words God and Jesus Christ.

The trend toward erasing traditional Christmas practices from our daily life is discouraging and disheartening. In a society already known for its selfishness and consumerism, it seems that a religious holiday would be an opportunity to celebrate something more essential, something wholesome and good and also something that would remind us of our nation’s history—one that is dominated with a spiritual and religious heritage.

In fact, rather than making Christmas the height of the selling season, why can’t the focus be on celebrating family and friendship, camaraderie and memories? Why can’t it be a time to reflect and celebrate our freedoms? Why can’t it be a season of extending a helping hand to the less fortunate? Why can’t it be a time to step back and meditate on the original meaning behind the Christmas holiday? And why can’t these important traditions be taught in our schools?

It has been 40 years since Charlie Brown, as he puzzled over the glitz and commercialism of the modern age, asked, “Doesn’t anyone know the true meaning of Christmas?” Linus responded by telling the story of Jesus Christ’s birth, as recounted in Luke 2:7-14, to his friends and classmates. What Charles Schulz’ beloved 1965 cartoon did not capture, however, was the growing aversion on the part of many school officials and public figures to anything remotely related to the true Christmas story. Hopefully, as our children ponder what Christmas is all about—a subject that almost certainly arises in the classroom—our teachers at least will realize that they have the right to truthfully answer the question. If so, our children will have the opportunity to experience the richness of our traditions and culture. And what better time than Christmas?

—-

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. Information about the Twelve Rules of Christmas and The Rutherford Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.

We love rankings, don’t we? Every Monday morning, sports fans clamor to the Internet or to the newspapers to see if their favorite team is ranked, and if so how far up are they? And on occasion, TV Guide ranks the best TV shows in history from no. 100 to no. 1. People Magazine each year has the Sexiest Man Alive issue. We love to see who is the first and the best.

If we were to do that amongst the women of the Bible, the list would be tremendous. Eve in the Garden of Eden, Sarah, Samuel’s mother Hannah, Ruth — so many would qualify. But the one who stands above all the rest is the one on whom we will speak this morning — Mary, the wife of Joseph and the mother of Jesus.

Much talk surrounds the person of Mary. In Roman Catholic dogma, much extra-biblical teaching exists in their Sacred Traditions about who exactly Mary was. According to their doctrine, Mary never sinned nor knew original sin (Immaculate Conception), remained a virgin her entire life (Perpetual Virginity), and was raised where her soul and body were reunited and she ascended into heaven to become “The Queen of Heaven” (the Assumption of Mary). Unless you grew up in a Roman Catholic background, these doctrines may sound very strange and foreign to you, and for good reason. Absolutely none of them is supported in Holy Scripture. In fact, from the Catholic Encyclopedia itself, they say in reference to one of these doctrines, the Immaculate Conception, that “no direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture.”

We hear a wonderful song by Buddy Greene sung around Christmastime called, “Mary, Did You Know?” The song asks Mary whether she know about all that the Christ-child would endure. But I wonder if Mary had any idea about how so many would elevate her to such heights of honor, veneration, and even worship!!

According to a Catholic News article, Pope John Paul II devoted his entire pontificate to her and even had the letter “M” embroidered on his garments. When he was shot in 1981 and his life hung in the balance, he kept saying over and over again “Madonna, Madonna, Madonna!” Not “God,” not “Oh, Lord Jesus.” He spoke of Mary’s name perpetually!

In the West Tennessee Catholic, they convey a report on the Pope John Paul’s 25th anniversary as Pope that he “publicly entrusted himself and the church to the Virgin Mary, again displaying a lifelong personal devotion that he sees as fundamental to his ministry.” He stated in St. Peter’s Square in October 2002:

I place everything into her hands so that with the love of a mother she will present it to her son. I also entrust my future to her.

With that, many follow the Pope’s lead, who in turn was following what other Popes had canonized into Sacred Law.

But where is the Scriptural support? There is none! Mary is only mentioned a few times in the Gospels and none at all after Acts 1. But the Scriptures tell us a number of things about Mary that are incredible examples for us in our daily walk. Understand, some exalt her to a far higher plane than warranted — but too often we Baptists lower her in reaction to Roman Catholic views. Let’s give her the due that Scripture does and see what it says about Mary and what it says to us even now.
1. Mary, did you know they would tell you that you were without sin?

According to Catholic dogma in their doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, they make the audacious claim that Mary was born without sin. As recently as December 8, 1854, in the Constitution Ineffabilis Deus, Pope Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary “in the first instance of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the meritsof Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin

According to their view, she received the same safe-keeping as Christ did from that original sin — otherwise, Christ could not be born without sin. But the fact is that not only does Scripture not support this (even from the Catholic encyclopedia, it states: “No direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture”,) not even Mary supports this!

She sees that she is in need of a Savior. Verses 46-47 tell us: “My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.” The way one seeks out godly humility is to look full-face toward God and see Him for who He truly is — and it is then you will see yourself for who you truly are.” Mary exalted the Lord God above all things in her heart — even in the most trying of circumstances.

For example: earlier in the chapter, the angel Gabriel approached Mary saying “Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you! . . . Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end” (Luke 1:28, 30-33).

She inquires as to how this will be — since she has never known a man! When the angel explains that God will implant a seed, she responds, “Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.” She submitted to God because she saw Him for who He was: ‘her savior’ (v. 47), ‘mighty’ (v. 49), and ‘holy’ (v. 49) — for starters!

This is where the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception falls apart. The doctrine states that Mary

Where is this found in Scripture? Nowhere. Scripture clearly states that there were times when even the Lord Jesus rebuked either His mother or those who tried to exalt her above her rightful place.

In Luke 11:27-28, we see a woman coming up to Jesus and saying, “Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts at which you nursed!” But he said, “Blessed rather [‘on the contrary,’ NASB] are those who hear the word of God and keep it!” So here we see someone granting a blessing toward Mary — clearly trying to compliment Mary for her role in raising such a fine boy! But Jesus immediately corrected her by saying there is something greater to bless — those who hear the word of God and keep it!

Note that the only one ever born who was without the stain of original sin was the Lord Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 5:21). Mary understood that she needed a Savior — but she also knew the God who would save and she rejoiced that God would favor her in being the vessel through which Christ would come?

2. Mary, did you know they would tell you that you could help redeem sinners?

A popular song sung during the Christmas season is “Ave Maria.” In fact, many sing this song in Protestant services. Why? Well, for one it is sung in Latin, so most folks who sing this do not know the words they are singing — nor do many care. It is set to such a beautiful setting by Franz Schubert (1797-1828) that this seems to be the biggest concern. (A word here — pay attention to what you are singing! You may love the tune, but Jesus did not tell us that we would be held accountable for the tunes we hum, but for the words we speak.)

Secondly, most do not see anything wrong with this theologically! But look at the words in English:

Hail Maria, full of grace, the Lord is with thee!
Blessed art thou among women and blessed is Jesus, the fruit of thy womb.
Holy Maria, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and in the hour of our death!
Amen.

There are so many issues with this: calling her ‘holy,’ the ‘Mother of God,’ etc. But primarily, the problem is that this is a prayer to Mary! Do we see this? This is a prayer addressed to someone other than God. We call it a prayer because we know from Mary’s faith and trust in Christ that she is in heaven. So this song calls on someone in heaven other than God to hear their prayer and take their prayers to God. This is called intercession.

Is this supported by Scripture? Not hardly! First Timothy 2:5 states, “There is but one God and one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus.” Jesus Christ is the only and exclusive intercessor in heaven between us and God. He is our sole mediator — and He is quite sufficient for the task. We need none other.

But we also notice the thrust of the prayer: “Pray for us sinners now and in the hour of our death!” Many believe with all their hearts that Mary brings some sort of salvation. Even recent pronouncements by Popes give credence to this.

In 1964, Pope Paul VI stated:

Rightly, therefore, the Fathers see Mary not merely as passively engaged by God, but as freely cooperating in the work of man’s salvation through faith and obedience. For as St. Irenaeus says, she being obedient, became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race.

In 1985, Pope John Paul II recognized Mary as co-redemptrix” during a speech in Guayaquil, Ecuador. He said, in part,

Having suffered for the Church, Mary deserved to become the Mother of all the disciples of her Son, the Mother of their unity…In fact Mary’s role as Co-redemptrix did not cease with the glorification of her Son.

In 1997, John Paul II again stated:

Mary … co-operated during the event itself and in the role of mother; thus her co-operation embraces the whole of Christ’s saving work. She alone was associated in this way with the redemptive sacrifice that merited the salvation of all mankind. In union with Christ and in submission to him, she collaborated in obtaining the grace of salvation for all humanity.

They are so fixated on her that they believe even her image brings some measure of grace. For instance, in November 2004, a stale grilled-cheese sandwich sold for $28,000 on eBay. The owner kept this sandwich sealed up for 10 years — keeping it with her even when she went to Vegas and felt the powers from it help her win $70,000 at the tables. She made it clear to the bidders on eBay that this item was not intended for consumption. But we hear of these ‘sightings’ all the time and hear of how people set up makeshift shrines in her honor. Clearly, people believe that she has some power to either save or to have great influence on her Son to save those who call upon her.

What does Scripture (and, yes, Mary) say? In verse 50, she says, “And his mercy is for those who fear him from generation to generation” (italics mine).

Now, before we take issue with those who call on someone else other than Christ to save them, it should be told that many around this world are trusting in something else other than Christ to save them. It doesn’t have to be Mary, but it can be your good works, your money and contributions to the church and other charitable organizations. Martin Luther was right: “The life of Christianity consists of possessive pronouns. It is one thing to say, ‘Christ is a Saviour; it is quite another thing to say, ‘He is my Saviour and my Lord.’ The devil can say the first; the true Christian alone can say the second.” This is what Mary did — directing all the attention to the Lord.

3. Church, do we know what made Mary so highly favored?

As mother of the Savior of the world, the Virgin Mary unquestionably holds forever a peculiar position among all women, and in the history of redemption. Even in heaven she must stand peculiarly near to Him whom on earth she bore nine months under her bosom, and whom she followed with true motherly care to the cross. It is perfectly natural, nay, essential, to sound religious feeling, to associate with Mary the fairest traits of maidenly and maternal character, and to revere her as the highest model of female purity, love, and piety. From her example issues a silent blessing upon all generations, and her name and memory are, and ever will be, inseparable from the holiest mysteries and benefits of faith. For this reason her name is even wrought into the Apostles’ Creed, in the simple and chaste words, ‘Conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary.'”

We see her humility. Her servant’s heart in responding to God’s angel by simply saying, “May it be according to your word” stands as a classic example and reflects greatly on where we should be. When we find ourselves so discouraged over trivial issues like burning our toast, getting stuck in traffic, our office buildings being too hot or cold — we look to how God worked in Mary’s heart for her to say, “Lord, this will seem like a scandal on the surface, some will shun me, Joseph may leave me — but I’ll follow you if this is your will!” What a great example!

We see her obedience to the Word of God. Psalm 119:14-15 says:

In the way of your testimonies I delight
as much as in all riches.
I will meditate on your precepts
and fix my eyes on your ways.

Whatever God said, she did. Why? Because she was His servant and she loved Him with all her heart.

We see her as a woman of prayer and praise! Psalm 73:24-25 sums up her attitude and I pray it sums up ours as well:

[24] You guide me with your counsel,
and afterward you will receive me to glory.
[25] Whom have I in heaven but you?
And there is nothing on earth that I desire besides you.

Psalm 34:2-3 says:

My soul makes its boast in the Lord;
let the humble hear and be glad.
Oh, magnify the Lord with me,
and let us exalt his name together!

We see that God is not partial to the rich and the powerful, but also brings mercy and favor to all who call on Him! In Isaiah 55:6-7, we read:

Seek the Lord while he may be found;
call upon him while he is near;
let the wicked forsake his way,
and the unrighteous man his thoughts;
let him return to the Lord, that he may have compassion on him,
and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.

Who is He speaking to? “Everyone who thirsts … and he who has no money” (Isaiah 55:1). And who is that? That is all of us. All of us are thirsty and hungry. The rich and the powerful seem to neglect this because they see themselves satisfied by material trinkets rather than the riches and glory of Christ Jesus. Matthew 5:3 says, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs in the Kingdom of God.” Blessed are you when you see yourself in your true condition — spiritually bankrupt! But Jesus goes on, “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled.”

Note Mary’s words in Luke 1:51-53:

He has shown strength with his arm;
he has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts;
he has brought down the mighty from their thrones
and exalted those of humble estate;
he has filled the hungry with good things,
and the rich he has sent empty away.
He has helped his servant Israel,
in remembrance of his mercy,
as he spoke to our fathers,
to Abraham and to his offspring forever.”

God has scattered the proud, the rich, the powerful — all those who set themselves up against a holy God. Those who are hungry (spiritually) are filled — those who try to fill that hunger out of their own resources are sent away empty.

What about you? Do you think you have things under control without God’s help? You’ll be sent away from His presence and provision empty! But once you empty yourself, you will receive good things — God things! What a blessing!

ConclusionSure, some take Mary too far in their devotion to her! But let us make sure we do not dismiss her in reaction! She is the most blessed among women and her example endures. What about you? Will you learn the lesson that Mary teaches about humility, obedience, prayer, praise, and the fact that God looks upon all of us for salvation? That is something that Mary would say, “Yes, I did know — and to God alone be the glory!

We love rankings, don’t we? Every Monday morning, sports fans clamor to the Internet or to the newspapers to see if their favorite team is ranked, and if so how far up are they? And on occasion, TV Guide ranks the best TV shows in history from no. 100 to no. 1. People Magazine each year has the Sexiest Man Alive issue. We love to see who is the first and the best.

If we were to do that amongst the women of the Bible, the list would be tremendous. Eve in the Garden of Eden, Sarah, Samuel’s mother Hannah, Ruth — so many would qualify. But the one who stands above all the rest is the one on whom we will speak this morning — Mary, the wife of Joseph and the mother of Jesus.

Much talk surrounds the person of Mary. In Roman Catholic dogma, much extra-biblical teaching exists in their Sacred Traditions about who exactly Mary was. According to their doctrine, Mary never sinned nor knew original sin (Immaculate Conception), remained a virgin her entire life (Perpetual Virginity), and was raised where her soul and body were reunited and she ascended into heaven to become “The Queen of Heaven” (the Assumption of Mary). Unless you grew up in a Roman Catholic background, these doctrines may sound very strange and foreign to you, and for good reason. Absolutely none of them is supported in Holy Scripture. In fact, from the Catholic Encyclopedia itself, they say in reference to one of these doctrines, the Immaculate Conception, that “no direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture.”

We hear a wonderful song by Buddy Greene sung around Christmastime called, “Mary, Did You Know?” The song asks Mary whether she know about all that the Christ-child would endure. But I wonder if Mary had any idea about how so many would elevate her to such heights of honor, veneration, and even worship!!

According to a Catholic News article, Pope John Paul II devoted his entire pontificate to her and even had the letter “M” embroidered on his garments. When he was shot in 1981 and his life hung in the balance, he kept saying over and over again “Madonna, Madonna, Madonna!” Not “God,” not “Oh, Lord Jesus.” He spoke of Mary’s name perpetually!

In the West Tennessee Catholic, they convey a report on the Pope John Paul’s 25th anniversary as Pope that he “publicly entrusted himself and the church to the Virgin Mary, again displaying a lifelong personal devotion that he sees as fundamental to his ministry.” He stated in St. Peter’s Square in October 2002:

I place everything into her hands so that with the love of a mother she will present it to her son. I also entrust my future to her.

With that, many follow the Pope’s lead, who in turn was following what other Popes had canonized into Sacred Law.

But where is the Scriptural support? There is none! Mary is only mentioned a few times in the Gospels and none at all after Acts 1. But the Scriptures tell us a number of things about Mary that are incredible examples for us in our daily walk. Understand, some exalt her to a far higher plane than warranted — but too often we Baptists lower her in reaction to Roman Catholic views. Let’s give her the due that Scripture does and see what it says about Mary and what it says to us even now.
1. Mary, did you know they would tell you that you were without sin?

According to Catholic dogma in their doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, they make the audacious claim that Mary was born without sin. As recently as December 8, 1854, in the Constitution Ineffabilis Deus, Pope Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary “in the first instance of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the meritsof Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin

According to their view, she received the same safe-keeping as Christ did from that original sin — otherwise, Christ could not be born without sin. But the fact is that not only does Scripture not support this (even from the Catholic encyclopedia, it states: “No direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture”,) not even Mary supports this!

She sees that she is in need of a Savior. Verses 46-47 tell us: “My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.” The way one seeks out godly humility is to look full-face toward God and see Him for who He truly is — and it is then you will see yourself for who you truly are.” Mary exalted the Lord God above all things in her heart — even in the most trying of circumstances.

For example: earlier in the chapter, the angel Gabriel approached Mary saying “Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you! . . . Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end” (Luke 1:28, 30-33).

She inquires as to how this will be — since she has never known a man! When the angel explains that God will implant a seed, she responds, “Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.” She submitted to God because she saw Him for who He was: ‘her savior’ (v. 47), ‘mighty’ (v. 49), and ‘holy’ (v. 49) — for starters!

This is where the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception falls apart. The doctrine states that Mary

Where is this found in Scripture? Nowhere. Scripture clearly states that there were times when even the Lord Jesus rebuked either His mother or those who tried to exalt her above her rightful place.

In Luke 11:27-28, we see a woman coming up to Jesus and saying, “Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts at which you nursed!” But he said, “Blessed rather [‘on the contrary,’ NASB] are those who hear the word of God and keep it!” So here we see someone granting a blessing toward Mary — clearly trying to compliment Mary for her role in raising such a fine boy! But Jesus immediately corrected her by saying there is something greater to bless — those who hear the word of God and keep it!

Note that the only one ever born who was without the stain of original sin was the Lord Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 5:21). Mary understood that she needed a Savior — but she also knew the God who would save and she rejoiced that God would favor her in being the vessel through which Christ would come?

2. Mary, did you know they would tell you that you could help redeem sinners?

A popular song sung during the Christmas season is “Ave Maria.” In fact, many sing this song in Protestant services. Why? Well, for one it is sung in Latin, so most folks who sing this do not know the words they are singing — nor do many care. It is set to such a beautiful setting by Franz Schubert (1797-1828) that this seems to be the biggest concern. (A word here — pay attention to what you are singing! You may love the tune, but Jesus did not tell us that we would be held accountable for the tunes we hum, but for the words we speak.)

Secondly, most do not see anything wrong with this theologically! But look at the words in English:

Hail Maria, full of grace, the Lord is with thee!
Blessed art thou among women and blessed is Jesus, the fruit of thy womb.
Holy Maria, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and in the hour of our death!
Amen.

There are so many issues with this: calling her ‘holy,’ the ‘Mother of God,’ etc. But primarily, the problem is that this is a prayer to Mary! Do we see this? This is a prayer addressed to someone other than God. We call it a prayer because we know from Mary’s faith and trust in Christ that she is in heaven. So this song calls on someone in heaven other than God to hear their prayer and take their prayers to God. This is called intercession.

Is this supported by Scripture? Not hardly! First Timothy 2:5 states, “There is but one God and one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus.” Jesus Christ is the only and exclusive intercessor in heaven between us and God. He is our sole mediator — and He is quite sufficient for the task. We need none other.

But we also notice the thrust of the prayer: “Pray for us sinners now and in the hour of our death!” Many believe with all their hearts that Mary brings some sort of salvation. Even recent pronouncements by Popes give credence to this.

In 1964, Pope Paul VI stated:

Rightly, therefore, the Fathers see Mary not merely as passively engaged by God, but as freely cooperating in the work of man’s salvation through faith and obedience. For as St. Irenaeus says, she being obedient, became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race.

In 1985, Pope John Paul II recognized Mary as co-redemptrix” during a speech in Guayaquil, Ecuador. He said, in part,

Having suffered for the Church, Mary deserved to become the Mother of all the disciples of her Son, the Mother of their unity…In fact Mary’s role as Co-redemptrix did not cease with the glorification of her Son.

In 1997, John Paul II again stated:

Mary … co-operated during the event itself and in the role of mother; thus her co-operation embraces the whole of Christ’s saving work. She alone was associated in this way with the redemptive sacrifice that merited the salvation of all mankind. In union with Christ and in submission to him, she collaborated in obtaining the grace of salvation for all humanity.

They are so fixated on her that they believe even her image brings some measure of grace. For instance, in November 2004, a stale grilled-cheese sandwich sold for $28,000 on eBay. The owner kept this sandwich sealed up for 10 years — keeping it with her even when she went to Vegas and felt the powers from it help her win $70,000 at the tables. She made it clear to the bidders on eBay that this item was not intended for consumption. But we hear of these ‘sightings’ all the time and hear of how people set up makeshift shrines in her honor. Clearly, people believe that she has some power to either save or to have great influence on her Son to save those who call upon her.

What does Scripture (and, yes, Mary) say? In verse 50, she says, “And his mercy is for those who fear him from generation to generation” (italics mine).

Now, before we take issue with those who call on someone else other than Christ to save them, it should be told that many around this world are trusting in something else other than Christ to save them. It doesn’t have to be Mary, but it can be your good works, your money and contributions to the church and other charitable organizations. Martin Luther was right: “The life of Christianity consists of possessive pronouns. It is one thing to say, ‘Christ is a Saviour; it is quite another thing to say, ‘He is my Saviour and my Lord.’ The devil can say the first; the true Christian alone can say the second.” This is what Mary did — directing all the attention to the Lord.

3. Church, do we know what made Mary so highly favored?

As mother of the Savior of the world, the Virgin Mary unquestionably holds forever a peculiar position among all women, and in the history of redemption. Even in heaven she must stand peculiarly near to Him whom on earth she bore nine months under her bosom, and whom she followed with true motherly care to the cross. It is perfectly natural, nay, essential, to sound religious feeling, to associate with Mary the fairest traits of maidenly and maternal character, and to revere her as the highest model of female purity, love, and piety. From her example issues a silent blessing upon all generations, and her name and memory are, and ever will be, inseparable from the holiest mysteries and benefits of faith. For this reason her name is even wrought into the Apostles’ Creed, in the simple and chaste words, ‘Conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary.'”

We see her humility. Her servant’s heart in responding to God’s angel by simply saying, “May it be according to your word” stands as a classic example and reflects greatly on where we should be. When we find ourselves so discouraged over trivial issues like burning our toast, getting stuck in traffic, our office buildings being too hot or cold — we look to how God worked in Mary’s heart for her to say, “Lord, this will seem like a scandal on the surface, some will shun me, Joseph may leave me — but I’ll follow you if this is your will!” What a great example!

We see her obedience to the Word of God. Psalm 119:14-15 says:

In the way of your testimonies I delight
as much as in all riches.
I will meditate on your precepts
and fix my eyes on your ways.

Whatever God said, she did. Why? Because she was His servant and she loved Him with all her heart.

We see her as a woman of prayer and praise! Psalm 73:24-25 sums up her attitude and I pray it sums up ours as well:

[24] You guide me with your counsel,
and afterward you will receive me to glory.
[25] Whom have I in heaven but you?
And there is nothing on earth that I desire besides you.

Psalm 34:2-3 says:

My soul makes its boast in the Lord;
let the humble hear and be glad.
Oh, magnify the Lord with me,
and let us exalt his name together!

We see that God is not partial to the rich and the powerful, but also brings mercy and favor to all who call on Him! In Isaiah 55:6-7, we read:

Seek the Lord while he may be found;
call upon him while he is near;
let the wicked forsake his way,
and the unrighteous man his thoughts;
let him return to the Lord, that he may have compassion on him,
and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.

Who is He speaking to? “Everyone who thirsts … and he who has no money” (Isaiah 55:1). And who is that? That is all of us. All of us are thirsty and hungry. The rich and the powerful seem to neglect this because they see themselves satisfied by material trinkets rather than the riches and glory of Christ Jesus. Matthew 5:3 says, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs in the Kingdom of God.” Blessed are you when you see yourself in your true condition — spiritually bankrupt! But Jesus goes on, “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled.”

Note Mary’s words in Luke 1:51-53:

He has shown strength with his arm;
he has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts;
he has brought down the mighty from their thrones
and exalted those of humble estate;
he has filled the hungry with good things,
and the rich he has sent empty away.
He has helped his servant Israel,
in remembrance of his mercy,
as he spoke to our fathers,
to Abraham and to his offspring forever.”

God has scattered the proud, the rich, the powerful — all those who set themselves up against a holy God. Those who are hungry (spiritually) are filled — those who try to fill that hunger out of their own resources are sent away empty.

What about you? Do you think you have things under control without God’s help? You’ll be sent away from His presence and provision empty! But once you empty yourself, you will receive good things — God things! What a blessing!

ConclusionSure, some take Mary too far in their devotion to her! But let us make sure we do not dismiss her in reaction! She is the most blessed among women and her example endures. What about you? Will you learn the lesson that Mary teaches about humility, obedience, prayer, praise, and the fact that God looks upon all of us for salvation? That is something that Mary would say, “Yes, I did know — and to God alone be the glory!

Too many seem to be more conditioned to their tradition than to the Lord Jesus Christ and His direction.Case in point.

The Pharisees were on the march again, this time they gathered to Jesus — along with some scribes who had been sent from Jerusalem!Those dispatched from Jerusalem have been called ‘theological hit-men’ — a great description![1]These Pharisees’ job consisted of being watchdogs of the people of God — and we see that they were keeping a rather close eye on Jesus.They wasted no time in letting Jesus know that He had broken one of their traditions.

It seems clear that Mark is writing to a Gentile audience, since those who were Jews would know right away the issue of eating with “defiled” and “unwashed” hands would entail.Verses 3 and 4 in the parentheses give some background.Jewish traditions were in place to help interpret God’s law.In fact, the Mishnah, which was a compilation of Jewish laws put together at the end of the 2nd century, said that “Tradition is a fence around the law.”[2]But soon, the interpretations of the law became more cumbersome and more binding than the law itself.And soon, there were dozens of often ridiculous traditions that interpreted the actual law.

Among them was this law concerning the washing of hands.The actual law was given inExodus 30:19 and 40:12.Originally, this law was given to the priests before they entered into the Tent of Meeting in the Tabernacle and the Temple.It was only a couple of centuries before Christ that all Jews were doing this so that they may be “clean.”

Mark 7:3 says that these priests washed their hands, but in the Greek it adds, “with a fist,” indicating that before meals they were to wash their hands, cupping the water in the palm, spreading and flexing their fingers so all the water could reach every part of the hand.Mark goes on to tell that they when they returned from the marketplace unless they wash, of in the Greek “unless they baptize.”This could mean that they took a bath everytime they returned from the marketplace to make sure that if they touched anything unclean, they themselves would be purified and made clean.

And lest you believe this was a minor detail, the Mishnah contained over 180 pages dealing with ceremonial washings, and 35 pages alone for the washing of vessels such as were mentioned in Mark 7:4, the “cups and pots and copper vessels and dining couches.”These people stayed in the tub or the sink!

Now we see this happening among the people of God even now.We have rules that have been added that interpret what God’s commands say.We see passages such as 1 Timothy 2:9-10 where Paul instructs Timothy “that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire,but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works.”Some have taken that to mean that women cannot wear jewelry nor put their hair up or the like, and miss the whole point of Paul’s desire being that women are to demonstrate their godliness rather than their goldliness.Or others who say that you should only wear a suit and tie to church and have a crew-cut for a haircut. Or saying there can only be a piano and organ in the church and that other instruments are worldly (and if you believe that, I encourage you to read Psalm 150).Still others who say that only one version of the Bible is the Word of God and the other versions are perverted.We have them as well.

But why?What’s the reason for all these?I believe there are four reasons why human beings, especially God’s people, hold to man-made religious traditions.

First, there is a true desire to be faithful.Not everyone who abides by these man-made traditions seek to hurt or harm the church.On the contrary, some who believe these man-made traditions do so because they are compelled to be obedient and faithful.It is a type of zealousness that is found in religions of all

kinds, not just Christianity.All we have to do is look at the Apostle Paul prior to his conversion and his zeal for the Jewish faith.He himself says in Philippians 3:6-7 that “as to zeal, [I was] a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness, under the law blameless.”Nicodemus was another one, I believe, who came to Jesus by night to seek out if Jesus really was from God — and I believe with a sincere heart.But no matter how sincere they were, they were hanging on to teaching and traditions and running on a counterfeit zeal that would not lead to salvation but to destruction.

Second, there is a desire to use these traditions for control.For many, especially leaders, when these man-made religions traditions are present, man-centered leaders use these traditions as leverage to control and manipulate those who are weaker in the faith so that they themselves are the standard rather than God.These Pharisees kept the people in constant fear of being thrown out of the synagogue, so these traditions were used for control.

Thirdly, there is a desire for comfort and security.People hold on to “the way it’s always been” simply because that is a considerable comfort zone.People by and large do not like change.In a world that is in constant motion and constant change around them, church is a place many desire to remain the same.The Pharisees were like this, but they were clinging to hard to comfort and security and so feared the authority that Jesus preached with and the type of Kingdom He was pronouncing that they missed His moving because their feet were stuck in the cement of their comfortable and secure traditions.

Lastly, there is a need for identity.The Pharisees liked being Pharisees because their habits, their own laws, their dress — everything about them — pointed to the fact that they were … Pharisees.They would say, “These are our traditions … how dare you not keep our traditions.”And many denominations, religions, and cults are formed — many churches split or fracture — simply because of certain man-made traditions that many refuse to let go of.

So what does Jesus say?We see in Mark 7:6-8

And he said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written,

” ‘This people honors me with their lips,

but their heart is far from me;

[7] in vain do they worship me,

teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’

[8] You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.”

Babe Ruth was at bat and Babe Pinelli was the umpire behind the plate. The first pitch was a swing and a miss, as was the second pitch. Babe Ruth digs in for the next pitch. The pitcher winds up and delivers, and Ruth doesn’t move. From behind the plate the umpire cries out, “Strike three!”

Ruth gets in Pinelli’s face and says, “There’s 40,000 people here who know that last one was a ball, tomato head.” Pinelli takes a look around the stadium, then responds to Ruth, “Maybe so, but mine is the only opinion that counts. The batter’s out!”[1]

No matter what you think, no matter what anyone in the world thinks — God’s verdict is the only one that matters.

These Pharisees felt that their traditions were pleasing to God — yet God in the flesh was standing right before them saying, “You are worshiping God in vain — you are elevating your doctrines to stand alongside the doctrines of God.Your lips may say all the right things, but you are hypocrites because your heart is far from me.”Jesus’ verdict is the only verdict that matters.Don’t let those outward traditions mutilate your upward exaltation of the Lord God.

And he said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition![10] For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’[11] But you say, ‘If a man tells his father or his mother, Whatever you would have gained from me is Corban’ (that is, given to God)—[12] then you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother,[13] thus making void the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And many such things you do.”

The traditions that we hold on to so very tightly may seem like they are spiritual, but are often simply a reflection — a mirror — of our inward convictions.Meaning that oftentimes we hold on to traditions in our life and in the life of the church because they reflect something we believe personally to be true but are just reflections of associations we have.

For instance, with music, I had encounters with people who felt that drums and guitars were not appropriate in a worship service (even though those instruments were used among God’s people in the Old Testament).What was their reasoning?It wasn’t a biblical one, but instead it was that those were the instruments used by “rock’n’rollers.”One time, I was giving a going away classical concert during an evening service — my last service as minister of music.I was going to put on the card music by George Gershwin.But relatives close to me felt that any jazz rhythms would be bad.Why?Because of their associations with jazz and New Orleans and the red light district.While it is good for us to understand these associations, we must ask God to enlighten us as to whether the traditions we hold to are biblical ones or simply and only reflections of our own personal convictions.

We see the hearts of the Pharisees put on display and their convictions exposed for all to see.Jesus reveals the sheer arrogance and hypocrisy of these religious leaders.Their teachings had grown to such an extent that the Mishnah even states that “It is a greater offense to teach anything contrary to the voice of the Rabbis than to contradict Scripture itself.”How preposterous!

Here, Jesus gives them a rather pointed example of how instead of bolstering God’s law, they actually nullify it — and the example He used is one that hits home with everyone, hurting one’s parents.

Moses’ law was clear.In fact, Jesus gives both the negative and the positive ofGod’s law on this subject.On the positive side, Jesus reminds them to “honor your father and mother.”In fact, this was so important that the Apostle Paul comments in Ephesians 6:2 that this is “the first commandment with a promise, that it may go well with you and that you may live long in the land” (see Exodus 20:12).On the negative side of this law, Jesus reminds them of Exodus 21:17 which says, “Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.”(It must be said that of all the laws in the Old Testament, only 35 come with the death penalty.Yes, adultery.Yes, even homosexuality.And listed among those are being disobedient and reviling your parents.A word to the wise is sufficient!)

Now, considering the gravity that Moses (and ultimately, God) placed on loving and taking care of your parents — a very basic duty — the Pharisees found a way to get around it and still keep their precious laws and traditions!They used ‘Corban.’ When something is designated as ‘Corban,” it is designated as a gift to God — and when done so, that gift cannot be given to anyone else but

God.The issue for the Pharisees was to keep your vow.But Jesus tells them that the greater issue is to ‘honor your father and your mother.’This was one mammoth example of many.

Then Jesus does something totally unexpected in the eyes of the Pharisees.He turns His attention away from them and then to the crowds and delivers a devastating blow to the Pharisees – again, by exposing their hypocrisy and saying something that one could only describe as revolutionary to the ears of the Jewish people.

14And he called the people to him again and said to them, “Hear me, all of you, and understand: 15There is nothing outside a person that by going into him can defile him, but the things that come out of a person are what defile him.”[a]17And when he had entered the house and left the people, his disciples asked him about the parable. 18And he said to them, “Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him, 19since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?”[b] (Thus he declared all foods clean.) 20And he said, “What comes out of a person is what defiles him. 21For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, 22coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. 23All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.”

Jesus begins speaking to the crowd and not only what He tells them, but that coupled with their reaction shows how much these teachers clung to outward rituals rather than an inward relationship.These teachers were clinging to the notion that being clean (read:holy) before God and one another consisted of what foods one ate and in what purity rituals one engaged.

The radical and revolutionary nature of what Jesus told the crowd in 7:14-15 must not be missed. He says, “There is nothing outside a person that by going into him can defile him, but the things that come out of a person are what defile him.”In one fell swoop, Jesus did away with the entire law of Moses dealing with clean and unclean foods.In fact, there were dozens of times that God mentioned in His law to the people of Israel which foods and animals were clean and were not — and the due penalties of touching or eating unclean foods.And now Jesus told them that their purity and holiness and cleanliness were based upon inward purity not outward.

Now again, the Law is not bad.On the contrary it is good — for it is God’s law.But in the hands of selfish, prideful, sinful individuals, it was contorted to fit their own scheme and thus masked their true spiritual bankruptcy.But Jesus would have none of it with them — and He will have none of it with us!

Remember back in verse 4 when Mark told us about the many other traditions they observed, such as the washing of cups and pots and dishes and dining couches?It is tragic that they were so concerned about the vessels they held in their hands rather than the main vessel that was held in their souls — their own hearts.They worked and slaved over the details of keeping any speck of dirt from landing on their utensils and containers, and yet were totally blinded to the muck and dirt and filth encrusted on their own heart!It’s as if God desired our hearts to be like a spotless, sparkling crystal vase received on our honeymoon — but really our hearts are like hospital bedpans in full use.

I say that because the human heart outside of the cleansing work of Jesus Christ is the most vile, filthy, disgusting, putrifying vessel in the universe.All our good works, our charitable endeavors, our humanitarian efforts — nothing on earth can begin to break through the grime that is caked on our human heart.When Paul said that we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, this is not like an Olympic pole vaulter trying to attain 16’ and missing by a toenail that just barely catches the crossbar.We do not even qualify for the race, do not even get in the building to watch the event, and are not strong enough to pick up the pole in the first place.

And notice that Jesus said all these evil things come from within!You may say, “I’m without Christ, yes— but I haven’t done those things!”Yes, you may not have on the outside, but those things are still there.So those Pharisees who thought they were clean based upon washing their hands and their bowls and cups and dishes could not lift one finger to wash their hearts.

And neither can you.

Conclusion

Here we have seen the importance to the Pharisees of washings.We also see from their worship the importance of the offering of sacrifices for the sins they have committed.But again, it doesn’t touch nor cleanse the human heart.

I believe this picture needs to be painted in order to understand how our salvation is nothing short of a miracle.What we couldn’t lift a finger to
accomplish, Jesus did so fully and completely.He washed us by the shedding of His blood for the forgiveness of sins (Hebrews 9:22; Ephesians 1:7; 1 Corinthians 6:11).As Corrie Ten Boom says, “There is no pit so deep nor so dark that God’s love is not deeper still.”

As for the sacrifices, where all those animals over all those centuries failed in achieving a clean human heart, Jesus in one act on Calvary those 2,000 years ago accomplished it fully and completely — or to put it as the writer of Hebrews puts it, “once and for all.”

It all comes back to the cross, ladies and gentlemen.God’s cleansing power on display in those drops of blood shed by our Savior.It puts all our traditionalism and legalism to shame — and us as well.To think we could cover our sin with a simple checklist of works shows how little we think of sin and how little we think of God’s nature and how little we think of Christ’s sacrifice.Sin is an offense against a holy God that cuts us off from Him.But you want to see what lengths it takes to make you pure?Look to the cross!Look to the Savior who hung there — for you!That’s the price that was paid to make you clean!

Yes!Your sin is great — we’ve seen that full force.But God’s grace is greater — do we see that in Jesus?If you do and have never received Jesus as Savior and Lord before, do so now!Do not wait.The highest of prices was paid to secure your salvation — won’t you receive Him this morning?